openSUSE Tumbleweed Begins Transitioning To x86-64-v2 CPU Requirements

[Mat2]

As my benchmarks have shown, there is little or no benefit of compiling code for the x86-64-v2 microarchitecture level as compared to x86-64 baseline. For more, please see:

https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2021-March/048739.html

https://openbenchmarking.org/result/...HA-UARCHLEVE55

Until someone demonstrates otherwise, I remain unconvinced.

[rmoog]

Are devs going to die if they don't shill for forced obsolescence? When did Linux become OSX and Windows in regards to hardware requirements?

[carewolf]

Are devs going to die if they don't shill for forced obsolescence? When did Linux become OSX and Windows in regards to hardware requirements?

It didn't.. macOS required AVX2 for years now on their Intel versions.. Microsoft won't even allow my 5 year old PC with 8 cores of AVX2 capable processor to run Windows 11... So no even this future openSUSE isn't becoming either of those.

[bug77]

It will be interesting to see if, and for how long, the interested tumbleweed community will be able to join together to support i586 systems (when Fedora dropped i686 support, there was an insufficient number of people that were willing and able to commit their own resources to create, maintain, and support, an i686 alternative architecture SIG).

Of course that won't work. I mean, Suse has OBS and everything, but this is more about testing using the proper hardware. Nobody's going to sign up for that.

[erniv2]

It didn't.. macOS required AVX2 for years now on their Intel versions.. Microsoft won't even allow my 5 year old PC with 8 cores of AVX2 capable processor to run Windows 11... So no even this future openSUSE isn't becoming either of those.

Yep, and if you realy still need 32 bit 586 support you dont run opensuse tumbleweed in the 1st place systems back then had like 64mb ram in a standard setup and even newer pc´s came with max 2gb and no real workload runs with that today.

So what is the problem with haveing to install x64 ? holy crap my pentium 630 1gb from 2005 came with a x64 ready bios, and well yes a pentium 630 was a 1c/2t cpu with sse3 max so it will fall out of that x64-v2 scheme but it will still run with a older distro, or one thats tailored for old systems with less bloated DE´s.

So i dont get why all call dont phase out old hardware, well we have 2022 soon 2023 and things need to move forward.

[S.Pam]

I'm mostly OK with this as long as there are supported/maintained distros which are compiled with support for older CPUs.

After all if you have such an old system you wouldn't use it as your desktop PC anyways considering how bloated current DEs and web browsers are.

Just a reminder, Nehalem was released 14 years ago, with the most famous CPUs of the lineup being the Core i7 870 (4-core, 8 threads)/Core i5 750 (4 cores).

Just go with Gentoo and -march=native

[HechKim]

This is really a bad decision, there are three laptops and a desktop in my house and only one of the laptops is compatible with this hardware requirement but because it has a NVIDIA GPU. Linux is not used on it

[rmoog]

Yep, and if you realy still need 32 bit 586 support you dont run opensuse tumbleweed in the 1st place systems back then had like 64mb ram in a standard setup and even newer pc´s came with max 2gb and no real workload runs with that today.

So what is the problem with haveing to install x64 ? holy crap my pentium 630 1gb from 2005 came with a x64 ready bios, and well yes a pentium 630 was a 1c/2t cpu with sse3 max so it will fall out of that x64-v2 scheme but it will still run with a older distro, or one thats tailored for old systems with less bloated DE´s.

So i dont get why all call dont phase out old hardware, well we have 2022 soon 2023 and things need to move forward.

The problem is that I have a 2GB dualsocket i686 lying around that sometimes does indeed need Linux. I can't transfer DOS games from SFTP/HTTP servers from within FreeDOS 1.3, because network workloads in FreeDOS are unstable. WatTCP can't even do DNS resolution correctly and threatens its users that resolving its own IP address over DHCP may hang the system, which can be fatal under DOS because we don't have journaled filesystems there. I need to dualboot that computer with a Linux system. I would also appreciate if some crypto yobs couldn't hijack my DOS gaming computer when it's copying games.

I exist. To the devs, please, stop turning Linux into a proprietary-minded dumpster fire that stays relevant in the news only by deprecating things.

Edit: I also have prepared a similar setup on an IBM ThinkPad 600E for my younger brother because he also wants to have a DOS gaming PC that can siphon games from the internet by booting into a currently supported OS. I'm short of finding a working CDROM for him from sending that laptop back to him.

[mangeek]

Are devs going to die if they don't shill for forced obsolescence? When did Linux become OSX and Windows in regards to hardware requirements?

"Linux" can still boot and run on my circa 1993 Mac Quadra. There's nothing keeping hobbyists from grabbing the last distro that worked and building more recent packages. Frankly, if your interest is running antique hardware, getting comfy building your own kernels and packages from source is part of the game anyways. Mainstream distros have more tightly-scoped goals, they should be following the 80/20 rule (or something like it) and targeting stuff that's running production workloads.

[Slartifartblast]

As my benchmarks have shown, there is little or no benefit of compiling code for the x86-64-v2 microarchitecture level as compared to x86-64 baseline. For more, please see:
https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermai...ch/048739.html
https://openbenchmarking.org/result/...HA-UARCHLEVE55

Until someone demonstrates otherwise, I remain unconvinced.

One of the links points out quite a benefit moving to V3....

"there is a moderate benefit of *-march=haswell* (x86_64-v3) - of around
10%-20% as compared to baseline for the tests performed"

10-20% is not to be sniffed at.